Because in your way to calculate it, it "rewards" people for not participating a lot. There should be an incentive to play. You miss too many tournaments you should also face to consequences (not enough points) .
On the other side, people that play but only win small amounts in small tournaments have no rewards for being a active participant.
Hope you know what I mean.
And let's be real, there won't be a tournament with 100 players. The last series (2021, couldn't find one after) organized here had 14 participants.
The incentive is the same: the prize money won and leaderboard winnings. Maybe this way (proposed by OP) more players will be interested, but I was arguing for the fairness of the leaderboard rather than ways to achieve more participants. I know very well that without any sponsorship, it is very hard to attract players.
There is a big incentive or at least there has been for all the past series. There is anywhere from a 1k-5k prize pool for the finale and all the money you can win in each single tourney. Always been plenty of incentive IMO.
Easy solution for that, just make the min entrants number the same number as min points possible to earn. If there are points for 10th Place make it so there must be a minimum of 10 people playing or the event doesn’t take place. Or less, min 5 players to run and top 5 get points.
What if in one tournament 11 players play and in the second one 100 players play? Do you think first-place winners in both tournaments should get equal points?
My suggestion focuses on ascribing a fixed value to each participant, which is already there—we call it 'buy-in' in poker
. Why create unnecessary variables and complications? Just calculate the total money won and decide rankings.
Honestly, it's supposed to be a series and all players should be committed to playing every single game. Shouldn't be all this 100 1 week then 25 the next. You're playing a series and you take away from it by missing games. Also shouldn't allow ppl to join if they didn't play week 1, but we have been super lenient and not put rules in place for people saying they must play all games or cannot play if they didn't play in week 1.
I would love to see 20-40 commit to playing every game in the series regardless of if they get way behind in points. I doubt that happens as far as everyone commit, but it would be nice. There is a core group of 10 or so that have played every single game. There is prize money to be won in every single game regardless of your points standing. Considering paying out more spots as well and more than 1 table for the final game. Lots of things to think about if we get this going.
I would like to know where does the tournament will have place, I mean what casino will host it? The past one was on betnomi, but that casino didn't have a happy end. And after the bad relation with the forum I don't think the owner wan to host another tournament in the new platform.
Maybe stake would like to host a tournament like this, but they are so big for a small event like this, so, what options we have?
I wouldn't let betnomi or whatever the new platform is called host another series if they offered us 500k pool. They have burned their bridge with me as far as I am concerned. It is going to be on a platform that's been around awhile, but I'm not gonna say unless they agree to host the series. It's not hard to figure out with a little research though.